Wise Man Says
Striker
If Test cricket dies, my interest wanes massively.
The pyjama stuff doesn't really do much for me.
The pyjama stuff doesn't really do much for me.
- Status
Twisted
Striker
i have given this a like, but i don't like it at all, it's just the same as i feel.
It's the same for me, I've found that since the India test series ended, my general cricket interest has decreased to the point where I'm not even following what's going on at the moment because everything is gearing up for yet another pyjama world cup, something I most definitely won't be watching.
I get the argument about T20 entertaining people, but it's missing the point of cricket. It's a version of the game designed to be batsmen vs batsmen, a great bowling performance where a team gets skittled for fuck all gets criticised for shortening the 'show' and spoiling the 'spectacle' rather than praised as it should be for being great bowling. The same thing happens, albeit to a lesser extent, with the longer form of the pyjama game.
As much as I'd like to see all pyjama cricket consigned to the history books, it is a necessary evil. I just wish there seemed to be more of a concerted effort from the powers that be to find a way to make room for both forms of the game to be accommodated without players having a conflict of interests over the priority of test cricket vs the pyjama coin.
Voice of fair play
Striker
I agree there is a conflict of interests and the powers of be need to find room for all formats of the game.
What gets me on this thread is the snobbery attitude to other forms of the game apart from tests.
For example statements from some people like hit and giggle and pyjama cricket comes across snobbery IMO.
The bottom line is millions and millions of people find One day cricket and 20/20 included very very entertaining to watch and the cricket skills on show are fantastic.
Before 20/20 was even invented cricket fans have always preferred to watch a Botham or Sobers hitting the ball out of the park than a Boycott for example.
Even in the striving Durham Leagues years ago the biggest gates were when the top class overseas pros were in the league,fans came to watch them hit the ball to all parts,cricket fans have always preferred seeing big shots played and always will IMO.
I get what you say about Botham and Sobers hitting it out of the park, but surely the excitement of that was that to do that in a test match is to take a genuine risk. The pyjama game is specifically structured to allow batsmen to take massive swings at it, whereas test cricket is designed to be a contest between bat and ball where the batsman has to work for his runs because the bowler can set whatever field he wants. Personally, I really enjoy watching someone like Boycott or Cook build an innings slowly and carefully, it's a fantastic show of skill to see a batsman getting the better of a bowler like that.
I don't think references to pyjama cricket are necessarily snobbery, it's more that people can see through coloured kits as nothing more than a gimmick to try and make the game seem more attractive to non-cricket fans, similarly the way they've constantly tinkered with the rules to make it easier for the batsmen to score runs. I've certainly never heard a good reason why the short form of the game needs coloured kits, fielding restrictions and a wide called if the ball goes an inch behind the batsman's legs.
Hulkster
Striker
To me the conflict shouldn't be between T20 and test cricket; it's should be between T20 and ODI.
T20 has rendered ODIs completely pointless, it's usurped the original appeal of being fast paced, entertaining cricket that appeals to the casual fan.
ODIs kind of combine the worst of both worlds; slow and boring compared to T20s, but nowhere near the 'pure' form of the game that test cricket represents.
Of course the occasional game can be exciting when they are close, but that's true of any sport.
I'd much rather watch a T20 game, even a two innings one than a ODI, and I'd rather watch a test over an ODI as well.
T20 has rendered ODIs completely pointless, it's usurped the original appeal of being fast paced, entertaining cricket that appeals to the casual fan.
ODIs kind of combine the worst of both worlds; slow and boring compared to T20s, but nowhere near the 'pure' form of the game that test cricket represents.
Of course the occasional game can be exciting when they are close, but that's true of any sport.
I'd much rather watch a T20 game, even a two innings one than a ODI, and I'd rather watch a test over an ODI as well.
Aidan11
Winger
Test cricket wont die. Whether the number of test nations diminishes is another matter. The trouble is for me, I am in my late forties and the late 70's early 80s was a golden period for me - Botham, Gower, Gooch, Willis were the players I admired. Then there were greats like Richards, Lloyd, Greenidge, Holding etc for West Indies. Aus had the Chappells, Marsh, Lillee, Thommo,... India had Gavaskar, Bedi...
Test cricket was a lot simpler then too. You didn't have to book your ticket a year in advance and at an inflated price. Turn up, sit on a wooden bench, no big screens or electronic scoreboards, no razzamatazz. Now grounds have turned into virtual stadiums and you can even hear commentary while you sit at the ground watching the game. They are even contemplating Day/Night tests.
It wont disappear up its own arse but its appeal could certainly diminsh.
Test cricket was a lot simpler then too. You didn't have to book your ticket a year in advance and at an inflated price. Turn up, sit on a wooden bench, no big screens or electronic scoreboards, no razzamatazz. Now grounds have turned into virtual stadiums and you can even hear commentary while you sit at the ground watching the game. They are even contemplating Day/Night tests.
It wont disappear up its own arse but its appeal could certainly diminsh.
Bri
Striker
What I used to like back then (it happens now but not as much) was that the different test nations had different styles. The Indians in particular, very strong in spin and not so much now but their better used to be very 'wristy' - good to watch.
Twisted
Striker
i compare it to a penalty shoot out without the preceding football. without the drama of the build up the outcome is fairly inconsequential to me [as a neutral]
millions and millions of people enjoy listening to rihanna or britney spears anarl, doesn't mean it's owt worthwhile.
Voice of fair play
Striker
Hardly a fair comparison that mate
That's quite a good analogy really, you get to see the ball hit the net several times, but it's meaningless when compared to Borini putting it into the roof of the net at the landfill in a proper match (for example
)
Voice of fair play
Striker
Not sure about that mate,only last year David Lloyd was saying the 20/20 finals day have overtaken the 50 over final day as the biggest day out for the county fans
Struts
Winger
Yeah but Bumble is almost like a t20 lobbyist, he will say stuff like that. Seems to forget the years when finals day has been held at grounds like Sophia Gardens and The Rose Bowl and half the seats have been left empty. Anyway if you asked most County members what they would rather have if they couldn't win the Championship or be promoted from Division 2 nearly all of them would choose a trip to Lords for the Cup final.
Twisted
Striker
which one? i assume you mean the second one which whilst sounding flippant is a fairly easy response to someone trying to justify their argument by saying 'lots of people like t20' obviously that is true and it does mean it will not go away any time soon, but it certainly doesn't mean it has virtue as a result.
mcdonalds, probably the biggest selling food in the world, the world would still be much better off without it.
rentaghost
Striker
I can accept that however to all intents and purposes it is a separate sport to me which is having a massive negative impact on the sport I love.
Voice of fair play
Striker
I certainly see what a lot of people are saying they prefer tests and see it getting less popular which of course is sad,like I said earlier the Ashes should always be the pinnacle of the sport and rightly so,however there is certainly room for 20/20 in the calendar as well,I believe they need to work together for the long term future of the sport.
What prompted me to reply to this thread is the constant criticism and belittling of 20/20on this site,it has brought well needed revenues to the counties and as long as it does not overtake test cricket it should be welcomed.
The bowling,batting and fielding skills are excellent it in my opinion and very good to watch,20/20 is not hit and giggle as some have said(not yourself) but something that myself and many cricket fans enjoy.
Twisted
Striker
i think the reason for the divide is they do not seem to be good bed fellows... i would be fine with t20, it's not for me but fair enough but it does seem to exist to the detriment of what i consider to be proper cricket - ie taking the best part of the british summer, overloading the calendar, taking some of the best players out of the test game as they focus on t20 etc etc
Voice of fair play
Striker
Yeah fair enough mate think it is all about getting the right balance between the two.
- Status
